MajorUrsa
Max Output Level: -88 dBFS
- Total Posts : 130
- Joined: 2007/02/01 20:57:43
- Status: offline
RE: Tried Sonar demo but Reaper kills it
2007/02/14 08:39:53
(permalink)
ORIGINAL: kp
Longer term, it's an unsustainable model. With potentially so many versions in the wild, tracking user problems and identifying which version is being used, whether it's been fixed in a later one etc, becomes an all-but-impossible job. With a fairly small user base, it's probably not that hard to deal with but if the developers, or Reaper users, expect things to carry on like this, they'll be in for a painful surprise.
O, you mean like moving around user-data folders to another place to be compatible with Vista? Yes, it was in the Readme, but this upgrade was done was nothing more than a big patch-dump, fitting some shareware tool, not an expensive industry standard.
The fact that it's also only 2 people in the development company is a potential worry for users too. We all know that companies can and do go bust, so I'm not saying that any software is safe against that, but such a small company is both worryingly prone to terminal losses (say one of them is injured) or developer ennui (something more interesting comes along and they stop development and support of Reaper). We've actually seen the advantages of a larger company ourselves here in the last few months, with Rob Kuper changing jobs, but being ably replaced by Noel Borthwick, who's another long-standing employee of the company. That kind of continuity is important if you want to be able to rely on your tools in years to come as much as possible.
I can't prove it but I would be surprised if more than 3 core-programmers worked at CW, and that's ok: There's no better guarantee for bloated, cluttered and abbandoned code than having a 'professional' team of far too many 'programmers' who aren't allowed to touch the code anyway, for fear of making it incompatible (Microsoft has several hundreds of people on Office alone, lol). To tell you the truth, the fact alone that they work with only 2 really good (obviously) programmers makes me trust this program more then anything. This code is under constant scrutiny, clean and lean and mean. I bet that each of the programmers can dream most of the code, on demand. I've been there myself. The download footprint is 2M only, and it runs before a release the left mouse that started it. I'm not to bash Sonar. I think that CW, of the big names, is the most reliable, friendly and trustworthy company. Sonar is an excellent package and if you take good care of it it can be a great friend. However, I'm a new user of it, and have encountered several problems that, after enquiry, appeared to be in it for ages. Some of them are so easy to fix that I get really frustrated running in to them over an over. Even more problematic are the features that once seemd to work but are slowly degrading in functionality. One would suspect from professional software ate this price-level that every feature (those reasons to upgrade a few years ago) is thoroughly tested for functionality. Not so. In my experience the gradual degrading of features is a sure sign of dirty code, with lack of maintenace. So, Sonar being the best, they now get serious competition from the other side. And I'm not talking about price here. It's about technical things and code solidity. Frequent code updates are not a sign of instability, on the contrary, they are sign of having a firm grip on the code and it's purposes. Also, it is not impossible to make a good DAW for this money, as someone said. Some of the best applications are free and far better than there bloated, expensive and clumsy alternatives. The latter often have far better marketing though. Sonar is currently the best, but is shows signs of clutter and old age. Reaper proves it is possible to make a very functional DAW within a short time. Maybe CW already knows that and is that why they did Project 5, which does feel leaner and more solid than Sonar. Maybe they should just rewrite Sonar again, from the ground up. Anyone calling us bashers should try Reaper first and then come back. You will know what this is about then. CW is now building Sonar 7, which we can upgrade too for another $100. I'm almost certain that many of the requested improvements will not be in it, and I don't expect MIDI to get any better. There will of course be some new blinking feature included, why else upgrade. I'm wondering how many new features will be part of Reaper in the coming months we wait for S7? And that for free. Ursa..
|
daverich
Max Output Level: -41 dBFS
- Total Posts : 3418
- Joined: 2003/11/06 05:59:00
- Location: south west uk
- Status: offline
RE: Tried Sonar demo but Reaper kills it
2007/02/14 08:53:57
(permalink)
I really like reaper, but I'm very used to working in sonar now, and work-flow wise i'm a bit nervous of rocking that boat. I also really like the sonitus plugs, the perfect space plug, and v-vocal although crap does have it's uses ;) (I'm on sonar5 so no audio-snap) I've not upgraded to sonar6, although this is mainly because s5 suits me just fine, it's also because each version sees sonar become more and more bloated. Sonar is at it's best when it's at it's simplest - i.e, the routing, track folders etc - great to use and very simple. That said, I dont like the feeling that the whole thing isn't *quite* ticking along smoothly, and I'm intrigued by the comments I've read about reapers midi-timing, could it be that solid-timing which I've not heard since Logic Plat5 is back on the pc? - I'll have to give it a ago :) Whatever you think about all this, I think it's safe to say the future ISNT cubase. :D {edit} and I still remember how incredibly frustrating it was that sonar didn't have a metronome, or proper busses. The development cycle of reaper certainly is attractive. Kind regards Dave Rich
post edited by daverich - 2007/02/14 09:17:00
|
yep
Max Output Level: -34.5 dBFS
- Total Posts : 4057
- Joined: 2004/01/26 15:21:41
- Location: Hub of the Universe
- Status: offline
RE: Tried Sonar demo but Reaper kills it
2007/02/14 09:02:36
(permalink)
ORIGINAL: daverich
...Whatever you think about all this, I think it's safe to say the future ISNT cubase. :D...
"At Steinberg, we see customer satisfaction as a particularly insidious form of piracy, and a clear violation of the EULA..." I think the OP's point has been made, and rebutted. Is it safe to say that this thread is now merely a flame war and should be locked up for posterity? Cheers.
|
kp
Max Output Level: -61 dBFS
- Total Posts : 1496
- Joined: 2004/01/21 15:22:09
- Location: London, UK
- Status: offline
RE: Tried Sonar demo but Reaper kills it
2007/02/14 09:12:12
(permalink)
ORIGINAL: MajorUrsa
ORIGINAL: kp
Longer term, it's an unsustainable model. With potentially so many versions in the wild, tracking user problems and identifying which version is being used, whether it's been fixed in a later one etc, becomes an all-but-impossible job. With a fairly small user base, it's probably not that hard to deal with but if the developers, or Reaper users, expect things to carry on like this, they'll be in for a painful surprise.
O, you mean like moving around user-data folders to another place to be compatible with Vista? Yes, it was in the Readme, but this upgrade was done was nothing more than a big patch-dump, fitting some shareware tool, not an expensive industry standard.
Eh? How is that similar to "so many different versions around"?
I can't prove it but I would be surprised if more than 3 core-programmers worked at CW, and that's ok:
I don't know either, but the number in itself isn't the problem - it's that if one goes, there aren't enough and/or the support infrastructure in place to replace them efficiently. Believe me, getting a replacement or new developer in is a very slow and painful process but having enough of a company there to manage this means it's far more practical
To tell you the truth, the fact alone that they work with only 2 really good (obviously) programmers makes me trust this program more then anything. This code is under constant scrutiny, clean and lean and
Absolutely they're good programmers, but there being only 2 means there's no-one scrutinising it. There's a balance between sprawling teams and tiny teams, but it's entirely possible that with no one to go "huh? that's a dumb way of doing that!", for example, development goes off on completely the wrong track and means massive headaches later. 2 is too few for a reliably sustainable development model, 200 is too many...
Frequent code updates are not a sign of instability, on the contrary, they are sign of having a firm grip on the code and it's purposes.
You've misunderstood that completely: it's not showing the code as is now is unstable, but that it *can* result in more instability due to rapid turnaround, lack of testing and more support issues later on.
|
Rednroll
Max Output Level: -80 dBFS
- Total Posts : 537
- Joined: 2004/09/17 13:31:13
- Status: offline
RE: Tried Sonar demo but Reaper kills it
2007/02/14 09:20:22
(permalink)
A DAW is complex, really, really complex, and even with the best will in the world, there's no guarantee that a change to module X won't have an unexpected impact on module Y, and the faster the changes, the more likely something like this is to happen, mainly because there can't be enough time for testing every other part of the application to make sure a real gotcha hasn't crept in. I'm not expecting it, or anything else for that matter, to be bug free but to have a reasonable amount of testing before it is made publicly available. Ok, let's take your point and then look at it from a hypothetical Sonar development standpoint. How many programmers do think there have been that have worked on Sonar throughout it's life??? 20?? 30??? I don't know, but I'm sure it's enough where they've run into a few snags of too many cooks can spoil the broth. So that in itself can introduce many "Gotcha's". Ok, aside from that wouldn't you say a new Sonar version comes out about once a year??? Let's say, Sonar has a beta team of users...let's be generous and say 20 Beta testers. So for months and months and months Cakewalk developers work on features without them being available to be used by a large variant of user systems and user workflows.......So probably 10 months of code writing probably only being tested minimally internally. Now compare that to Reaper. Every week there's usually at least 5 new features added and at the same time it's being tested and used by a larger segment of users and variations than Sonar. I'm sure Cakewalk doesn't have 300 employees with 300 different PC working for them....doing contnuous quality testing but in reality, that's pretty much what Reaper has. A feature is developed it's given to the user. Bugs are reported quickly and immediately addressed. So which app has the bigger chance of catching a "Gotcha"??? Is it the app that added 100 feature changes and subjected it to 20 different configurations and user variable workflows or is it the app that added 5 feature changes and subjected it to 300 different configurations and user variable workflows? I'll go with the second, it seems the odds are in my favor of catching a "gotcha" in the second scenario. Now even if a gotcha does get by in Reaper, Reaper is no worse off than Sonar would be...thus 8 months worth of programming that must be worked around to fix that gotcha.
|
manthe
Max Output Level: -82 dBFS
- Total Posts : 401
- Joined: 2005/11/20 18:24:57
- Status: offline
RE: Tried Sonar demo but Reaper kills it
2007/02/14 09:25:49
(permalink)
ORIGINAL: Rednroll
A DAW is complex, really, really complex, and even with the best will in the world, there's no guarantee that a change to module X won't have an unexpected impact on module Y, and the faster the changes, the more likely something like this is to happen, mainly because there can't be enough time for testing every other part of the application to make sure a real gotcha hasn't crept in. I'm not expecting it, or anything else for that matter, to be bug free but to have a reasonable amount of testing before it is made publicly available.
Ok, let's take your point and then look at it from a hypothetical Sonar development standpoint. How many programmers do think there have been that have worked on Sonar throughout it's life??? 20?? 30??? I don't know, but I'm sure it's enough where they've run into a few snags of too many cooks can spoil the broth. So that in itself can introduce many "Gotcha's". Ok, aside from that wouldn't you say a new Sonar version comes out about once a year??? Let's say, Sonar has a beta team of users...let's be generous and say 20 Beta testers. So for months and months and months Cakewalk developers work on features without them being available to be used by a large variant of user systems and user workflows.......So probably 10 months of code writing probably only being tested minimally internally. Now compare that to Reaper. Every week there's usually at least 5 new features added and at the same time it's being tested and used by a larger segment of users and variations than Sonar. I'm sure Cakewalk doesn't have 300 employees with 300 different PC working for them....doing contnuous quality testing but in reality, that's pretty much what Reaper has. A feature is developed it's given to the user. Bugs are reported quickly and immediately addressed. So which app has the bigger chance of catching a "Gotcha"??? Is it the app that added 100 feature changes and subjected it to 20 different configurations and user variable workflows or is it the app that added 5 feature changes and subjected it to 300 different configurations and user variable workflows? I'll go with the second, it seems the odds are in my favor of catching a "gotcha" in the second scenario. Now even if a gotcha does get by in Reaper, Reaper is no worse off than Sonar would be...thus 8 months worth of programming that must be worked around to fix that gotcha.
You are completely and totally cherry-picking numbers out of thin air. You have absolutely 0 idea if they are right or wrong or even the ballpark. NONE. Yet, you use these (fictitious) numbers to try to prove some point and make a resolution? I don't get it. So basically, you just made something up.
|
p8ddy
Max Output Level: -90 dBFS
- Total Posts : 18
- Joined: 2007/02/12 17:32:30
- Status: offline
RE: Tried Sonar demo but Reaper kills it
2007/02/14 09:36:45
(permalink)
ORIGINAL: Rednroll
That's not what I'm saying at all. Please point out to me where I said you should share my views. "that the majority of Sonar users in this forum, to put it frankly are just ignorant." "They are easily dazzled by bullet point features like 64 bit floating point audio engines which does nothing for your workflow" Will those select two satisfy you in the interim? Your focus is on workflow and you dismiss, out of hand, that others may actually see more benefit in an upgrade to the audio engine. That upgrade may only be of interest to a select few, but others should benefit too. Whether they understand the math and/or concept! ORIGINAL: Rednroll
What I'm saying is to be open minded...did you miss that part? I must have missed that point in amongst the respect you show for fellow posters and musicians. Open mindedness, discuss... "that the majority of Sonar users in this forum, to put it frankly are just ignorant." "I mean...who could want to Rewire Sonar to another host thru a rewire device support???" "Common sense and open mindedness is something you can not teach." "It's marketing propaganda at it's best. While Reaper users on the other hand have open discussions" "always a bunch of Sonar fan boys who wear blinders" "neanderthalls who can't take their blinders off for 2 seconds" And is this the same open mindedness where you are boasting about irritating people on the Cakewalk forums? The KKK forums must be awash with "open minded" people boasting about their exploits if this constitutes "open mindedness". Your second quote about rewire illustrates nicely the fact that you can't understand that others have differing needs from yourself. I have never needed, nor desired the functionality you mention. That doesn't mean it should be in the software, but the developers have to be pragmatic and try implementing features that will benefit the majority, or indeed offer something that a number of paying customers will enjoy. For example, they could implement a web browser in the software! I'm sure some users would find it useful but how much would it improve the software versus the potential effects on stability, file size/install size? They could develop a synth that only operates in the ultra sonic range, again, how would it benefit the comunity versus the potential negatives? We could spend all day comparing features across DAWs. Every developer/user places different importance on different things. Just because you can show one example where Reaper was quicker to act/acted at all over Sonar doesn't mean your favoured software is superior. No matter how many times you infer it. ORIGINAL: Rednroll
Just because you don't have a personal benefit to a particular feature it doesn't mean that it's not important to other people who work in the audio and music industry. Just as importantly, but which you fail to mention, it doesn't mean that it is important either! Each developer has to make their own decision. With a larger installed user base I would suggest that probably Cakewalk gets it right more often than not. Otherwise Reaper would be taking over the world! ORIGINAL: Rednroll
Why pigeon hole the product that you're so busy defending??? Does that seem beneficial to you to pigeon hole a product where only a select few people find the workflow good enough to fit their needs? I have no problem with Sonar workflow. It would appear I'm in the majority. We all have things we would like added, or that we might change, but that's exactly the same with any product. I have a pair of Abercrombie and Fitch "Burmac" trousers. They are my favorite trousers! Does that mean they are perfect? No. Does it mean they are good enough? Too right! And so Sonar is for me. I'll try Reaper, like I try most things, but from the screenshots, the GUI leaves a lot to be desired, especially in comparision to Sonar. That will affect my workflow. ORIGINAL: Rednroll
That sounds like a recipe for failure to me. What I'm saying is although, you may not personally see the benefit in a particular function, then how do you benefit by talking negative about it??? Why can't you read the information and just say, "Well, I don't have a particular use for that function, but I see your viewpoint of how that could be useful to you". Mmmm..ok. Like you did with - "features like 64 bit floating point audio engines which does nothing for your workflow" Can you quote where I spoke negatively of any feature implementation? I'm only saying it's a balancing act. And a balancing act that Cakewalk would appear to be getting right, given their market position. Personally, I'd rather have a smaller feature set and a more stable product with a smaller footprint than a huge piece of unstable bloatware (are you reading Bill Gates??) like midi "Input Quantize" - That might be a useful feature for me as well as for you. I wouldn't speak negatively of added functionality as long as they weren't at the expense of stability or useability. ORIGINAL: Rednroll
Now in regards to "Quality" by adding functions, what it sounds like to me you are saying is that you have NO confidense in the developers at Cakewalk to be competitent enough at what they do, to add functions without effecting the quality of the product. That's exactly, what you're saying with that last statement.....and you know what.???...You're probably right. That's not what I am saying. You're trying every loggical fallacy in the book! Straw man being your favorite, closely followed by Argumentum ad hominem and Dicto simpliciter. I am saying I would like added functions but not at any cost. I'm a software developer, I know how software works. The more code you put in, the greater chance that there will be bugs. In no way do I doubt the skills of the Cakewalk developers, I simply know that there is a correlation between complexity and prevelance of bugs. I also know that when feature creep occurs and software specs are ever expanded it's not a recipe for bug free software. That's not a lack of confidence, it's simply cold hard fact. You might like the "all you can eat" approach where your every whim is catered for (because the impression you give is that Reaper is the software product where the develpers never say "no!"), me I prefer a methodical, well planned release that is well tested and robust. I like the idea that the developers at Cakewalk are professionals, and not, ultimately dime a dozen halfwits who cant say no to the smallest request. "Never mind the quality, feel the width". Yeah, right. ORIGINAL: Rednroll
With a statement like that it sounds like you've never used a piece of software. What's the entire benefit of software over hardware???? The benefit is that it can be made so that's it's flexible to do multiple tasks and configured so we both can have our individual items and accept the fact that there can be items in the software that we may individually never need, but others can view that same feature as being indespencible. You just proved my point and showed the narrow mindedness that I see so often in this forum of individuals standing up on a podium and screaming...NO!!! NO!!! NO!!! I've used, and developed plenty. I don't lessons in software, and I don't appreciate your patronizing tone. Software shouldn't always be "flexible". "Configurable" maybe, but flexible? Internet Explorer being made "flexible" was the worst thing that evre happened to it. NCSA mosiac was pretty nice for its time. MS took it, tried to make it all things to everyone and ended up making peoples lives difficult. Software isn't a panacea, it's an enabler. A computer (PC) should be flexible, then you run the software you need to meet your requirements. It's not the case that you should have one piece of software that does everything - a jack of all trades. Your argument is flawed because no matter how many features you want in your software you'l never have enough - but what you will have is an unruly morass. You're right though. I am narrow minded. I demand stable software. Over everything else. You can have all the features in the world but if the software crashes every 10 minutes it's worthless. So whilst you can play Tetris while surfing the net, watching a DVD and spell checking your posts all within Reaper I'll be happy using my stable, firmly specced and well thought out Sonar. ORIGINAL: Rednroll
Don't listen to his feature request...Listen to mine....ME!! ME!!! ME!!! ME!!!! ME!!!! When the correct answer within a software app is that it can be US!!! US!!! US!!! It's sad that I even have to explain the benefit of software to someone. It's sad that you actually believe that. Billy Corgan was once asked why he made all the decisions in the Smashing Pumpkins. His answer was, if we make a group decision we'll all be somewhat unhappy. If I make the decisions, at least one of us will be happy. In time, feature after feature after feature will make Reaper so complex and unusable that you'll rue the day you ever thought that was a good thing. Unless of course you're now going to say that Reaper developers don't accede to your every whim and desire and do sometimes say no to things! In which case you'll be saying that they pretty much make value judgements on features. .....just like the Cakewalk developers. Funny that. Who'd 'ave thunk it? /p
|
bermuda
Max Output Level: -52.5 dBFS
- Total Posts : 2271
- Joined: 2004/04/28 12:34:40
- Location: Bermuda
- Status: offline
RE: Tried Sonar demo but Reaper kills it
2007/02/14 09:52:05
(permalink)
Reaper is a one man show.
Whilst the one man is happy and driven, Reaper may have a future.
If he lives it may have a future
If he sells it, like he sold winamp then it may have a future
You can debate all you like on different benefits of approaches CURRENTLY being used...things change.
TO be honest I hate downloading patches for the multitude of software items I use. With constant updates, constant developmets and constant patches...I would never get to use the app. It would drive me nuts, nuts nuts nuts!
|
Richard Brian
Max Output Level: -40 dBFS
- Total Posts : 3519
- Joined: 2004/02/09 11:16:38
- Status: offline
RE: Tried Sonar demo but Reaper kills it
2007/02/14 10:01:29
(permalink)
I remember reading numerous "Spread the word" strategies in numerous Reaper forum threads, and then countless threads in the Sonar forum and other DAW forums from Reaper enthusiasts, just like this one, albeit this new one was apparently a mistake.
I've never seen a tactical discussion like that in the Sonar forum.
And then, with the Reaper warriors then rushing in to argue for their Reaper, it all seems a bit orchestrated, still. I can't help the impression it gives.
kind of like a group buy without a discount.
It's really amazing how people treat each other here,,, I hate having to dig through all this garbage to find useful information.
The tools you use are a personal decision,,, it's great be able to make informed choices, which should be the spirit of this forum. I'm with Jamester on this one,,, let's have some peace. Everyone back to your DAW's and make some music!!
Somebody forgot to tell the Reaper fanboys rallying even now, spreading their love and joy to the ignorant masses. That's great PR for Reaper, like an Ambassador of Verbal Diarrhea. 
|
gordonrussell76
Max Output Level: -56.5 dBFS
- Total Posts : 1879
- Joined: 2006/12/15 05:28:08
- Status: offline
RE: Tried Sonar demo but Reaper kills it
2007/02/14 10:17:58
(permalink)
Just want to clarify i am not saying that constant updates are an indication of instability, I understand that the guys developing reaper are tyring to amke it as good as possible as quickly as possible and that is the reason for the frequency.
What I was trying to say is the high frequency of code changes = high frequency of issues. THats it, it is a simple incontrovertable industry accepted concept.
You can in a startup situation ignore it for a limited period of time to make fast initiial market gains, its called the RAD (rapid application development) model, but in the medium to long term you have to revert back to the traditoinal model of proper testing etc to ensure stability accross the platform. Reaper will hit that wall, eventually, and that is probaly when the devopers will sell it and move on (like winamp). Fair play to them do the fun bit, sell it to a well respected company, and make lots of money for doing what they love. My hat is off to them. Hey maybe Cake could buy some of the intelectual rights and we can all be happy.
I think a lot of the SONAR guys on here are actually very open to Reaper, but some of the posts on here that are pro reaper come accross as ignorant, and ever so slightly like a spoiled child throwing a tantrum.
You are doing the Reaper company, and the larger part of the reaper community I would imagine a disservice, let us make up are own mind without being threatened or repeatedly told we're stupid, and you might jsut win a few more people over.
G
|
bermuda
Max Output Level: -52.5 dBFS
- Total Posts : 2271
- Joined: 2004/04/28 12:34:40
- Location: Bermuda
- Status: offline
RE: Tried Sonar demo but Reaper kills it
2007/02/14 10:21:17
(permalink)
ORIGINAL: MajorUrsa
Hi John, you make a good point here. Maybe Sonar is too big for me. And I will yet not move from Sonar to Reaper, but I will definitely pay the license for it, even if I would not use it at all. This is extremely good stuff. I had a project running within a few minutes, with 2 audio tracks and two PSYN II's using a staggering 2% CPU!!!
And, although the midi-editor looks simple it actually has more functions than Sonar, like splitting notes and stuff. Entering envelopes is a blast. And did someone mention sidechaining effects!? All there.
So I currently only see things I miss in Sonar, not the other way around. I didn't see trackfreeze of bounce to track, but maybe at this CPU loading that isn't even needed.
Ursa..
Sonar can split notes ...there is a Calscript for this..in fact Sonar midi has an incredible amount of flexibility through CALscripts written out there...hell you can get a grip on the Cal and write your own too. http://forum.cakewalk.com/fb.asp?m=961016 i hate it when folks say my dog can lick it's b****, and yours can't..when the dog being berated invented the b**** licking !
post edited by bermuda - 2007/02/14 15:57:03
|
p8ddy
Max Output Level: -90 dBFS
- Total Posts : 18
- Joined: 2007/02/12 17:32:30
- Status: offline
RE: Tried Sonar demo but Reaper kills it
2007/02/14 11:11:37
(permalink)
ORIGINAL: gordonrussell76
Just want to clarify i am not saying that constant updates are an indication of instability, I understand that the guys developing reaper are tyring to amke it as good as possible as quickly as possible and that is the reason for the frequency.
What I was trying to say is the high frequency of code changes = high frequency of issues. THats it, it is a simple incontrovertable industry accepted concept.
You can in a startup situation ignore it for a limited period of time to make fast initiial market gains, its called the RAD (rapid application development) model, but in the medium to long term you have to revert back to the traditoinal model of proper testing etc to ensure stability accross the platform. Reaper will hit that wall, eventually, and that is probaly when the devopers will sell it and move on (like winamp). Fair play to them do the fun bit, sell it to a well respected company, and make lots of money for doing what they love. My hat is off to them. Hey maybe Cake could buy some of the intelectual rights and we can all be happy.
I think a lot of the SONAR guys on here are actually very open to Reaper, but some of the posts on here that are pro reaper come accross as ignorant, and ever so slightly like a spoiled child throwing a tantrum.
You are doing the Reaper company, and the larger part of the reaper community I would imagine a disservice, let us make up are own mind without being threatened or repeatedly told we're stupid, and you might jsut win a few more people over.
G
Software that is in constant update mode is basically not release candidate software. It's at best at constant beta level. That doesn't mean it's unstable, but it does mean it shouldn't be assumed to be robust. Like you say, I'd be very open to Reaper. I will try it. I'm geeky that way, I like playing with things. I just don't buy blind optimism or have blind faith in any software product or company. I love Sonar, this is because throught my time writing/producing music it's ticked the boxes. But this has been over a period of years. If Reaper matures in the same way then great. The more choice we have the better. The more tools the better. It's also not Reapers fault that some people come on to this forum and act like asses. To cap a post of agreement, you're also right about these folks doing Reaper a disservice. Certainly, whilst interested in the software, I'm put off by the users! (or the more evangelical ones at least). /p
post edited by p8ddy - 2007/02/14 11:33:28
|
steve.stang03
Max Output Level: -90 dBFS
- Total Posts : 13
- Joined: 2007/02/11 13:17:55
- Status: offline
RE: Tried Sonar demo but Reaper kills it
2007/02/14 11:30:23
(permalink)
ORIGINAL: manthe
Did you miss this link that I posted?
http://www.cockos.com/forum/showthread.php?t=5790
...hence the 'sham'
It seems like the Reaper crowd would be a natural for Linux  There is no group of people, none, nada etc that even comes close to the zealots in the Linux community. Check out the news group comp.os.linux.advocacy sometime for a real laugh at psychosis displayed by some of these Linux religious zealots who are doing more harm to Linux's reputation than their twisted brains could ever conceive. The people preaching the Reaper religion should take a look at that group to see how silly those people look because it is similar to the way they are acting. FWIW Reaper and Linux are both excellent as is Sonar. IOW it's not the programs / operating systems, it's just a group of people that think they are doing the right thing, but are not. Just my 2cents.
|
ChuckB
Max Output Level: -89 dBFS
- Total Posts : 59
- Joined: 2005/10/06 17:55:29
- Status: offline
RE: Tried Sonar demo but Reaper kills it
2007/02/14 12:20:44
(permalink)
*yawn* This is like trying to have a discussion about politics or religion. Largely futile. in fact it brings to mind this bit of wisdom: Never try to teach a pig to sing; you'll only get frustrated AND you'll irritate the pig!
post edited by ChuckB - 2007/02/14 12:59:02
"Music is its own reward, make more music" Chuck
|
jshep0102
Max Output Level: -71 dBFS
- Total Posts : 984
- Joined: 2006/02/21 22:44:35
- Status: offline
RE: Tried Sonar demo but Reaper kills it
2007/02/14 12:49:34
(permalink)
Talk radio at it's finest. Chuck has spoken wisely. Nothin' to see here, folks... I know, everybody go make some music and share it instead! - Peace, Shep
SHEP-ASRock Z97 Pro4 - i7 4790K 4.0ghz - 16 GB DDR3 - Windows 10 Home - Apollo Twin USB Duo - UAD2 Duo - Digimax FS - Focal CMS50 - Raven MTi2 - Slate VMS 1 - Bluebird - Yamaha MOXF8 - Axe Fx Ultra - SPLAT 2017.2
|
MajorUrsa
Max Output Level: -88 dBFS
- Total Posts : 130
- Joined: 2007/02/01 20:57:43
- Status: offline
RE: Tried Sonar demo but Reaper kills it
2007/02/14 12:56:48
(permalink)
ORIGINAL: bermuda
Sonar can split notes ...there is a Calscript for this..in fact Sonar midi has an incredible amount of flexibility through CALscripts written out there...hell you can get a grip on the Cal and write your own too.
I looked but didn't find a script for it. I find CAL, although potentially powerfull, clumsy to use and breaking my workflow. Also, the CAL-scripts I use are not Undo-able. A basic operation like splitting a note (and glueing them) should be part of any editor. It's totally easy to make and a real proof-of-point for this thread. Ursa..
|
jinga8
Max Output Level: -17 dBFS
- Total Posts : 5817
- Joined: 2004/02/14 21:45:01
- Location: Oceanside, CA
- Status: offline
RE: Tried Sonar demo but Reaper kills it
2007/02/14 13:19:59
(permalink)
A basic operation like splitting a note (and glueing them) should be part of any* editor. * = any editor with the specifications that I sent to the company and they therefore implemented because I am omniscient in the area of what people want in an editing program (btw, this post was TOTALLY easy to, like, post, DUUUUUDE....) There will of course be some new blinking feature included, why else upgrade. URSA, URSA, URSA!!! (just don't blink or you'll be sucked in by Sonar's ubiquitous tractor beam!)
post edited by jinga8 - 2007/02/14 13:47:49
|
Rednroll
Max Output Level: -80 dBFS
- Total Posts : 537
- Joined: 2004/09/17 13:31:13
- Status: offline
RE: Tried Sonar demo but Reaper kills it
2007/02/14 14:00:46
(permalink)
And is this the same open mindedness where you are boasting about irritating people on the Cakewalk forums? If you look to the left you'll see how long I've been a member at this forum and how many posts I have posted, just like I can look to the left and see that you've posted 6 times in this forum and joined 2 days ago. Sorry, for jumping to a conclusion after monitoring this forum after many years of how things generally go in this forum. I know I probably shouldn't make generalizations like that.....maybe I can get a better feel about users in this forum like you after being a member for 2 days huh? I must have missed that point in amongst the respect you show for fellow posters and musicians. Yep, you've definately missed that since I probably haven't posted in this forum for over 6 months and since you've only been a member for 2 days....well you do the math. My days of respect for members in this forum are over.....been there...done that......didn't work. Your second quote about rewire illustrates nicely the fact that you can't understand that others have differing needs from yourself. No again, you fail to understand the writing that I typed before you.....otherwise, you would be able to understand that what you just wrote was exactly what I had explained about a large majority of users having closed minded communication about feature discussions in this forum, and I used rewire device as just one "example". Just like midi input quantize was an "example". Discussions on these "types" of topics generally bring a lot of unnecessary heated discussions since certain regular individuals in this forum don't see the need for them. Maybe if you would have been a member longer that 2 days in this forum, you would have some idea what I'm referring too....I suggest using the forum search feature and bring yourself up to speed if you really want to contribute in this discussion and actually bring something of that sounds like it has some mass behind it. Can you quote where I spoke negatively of any feature implementation? I'm only saying it's a balancing act. And a balancing act that Cakewalk would appear to be getting right, given their market position. Personally, I'd rather have a smaller feature set and a more stable product with a smaller footprint than a huge piece of unstable bloatware (are you reading Bill Gates??) LOL!!! I really can't believe you put all that in the same paragraph. Are you really that dumb??? Read what you just said....at least ten times and MAYBE you'll be able to see the irony in it. You probably won't see your own irony so let me spell it out for you. You're telling me that Cakewalk would appear to be getting it right due to their "market position". <Uhhhh??? One brief interuption before I continue.....weren't you the one who accused me of pulling ficticious numbers out of thin air??? Hmmm??? Is the Pot or the Kettle black???> Sorry...back to the point. so Cakewalk would appear to be getting it right due to their market share, but Microsoft Windows on the other hand is a huge piece of bloatware????.....Hey!!! I agree with that last statement....but doesn't MS also have the largest market share for an OS???? So by your own previous brilliant deduction about Sonar....you can say the same thing about Microsoft, that they must also be getting it right. I'm sure you must be one heck of a software developer.....usually you need to have step by step logical thinking in that type of work....but I can tell logic is definately out the window from what I'm reading from you. No wonder you think software needs a lot of internal testing before it hits the market....I'm sure something coming from you with that type of logical thought process would need a few software validation departments working full-time for each line of code you wrote. You're right though. I am narrow minded. I demand stable software. Over everything else. You can have all the features in the world but if the software crashes every 10 minutes it's worthless. So whilst you can play Tetris while surfing the net, watching a DVD and spell checking your posts all within Reaper I'll be happy using my stable, firmly specced and well thought out Sonar. Please point me to a Cakewalk release that have ever met those goals. Sonar stable and well thought out??? Show me one release of Sonar that has not had at least 2 update release patches due to bug fixes. The proof is in the pudding as they say, so what you're saying you want is definately not Sonar, and Sonar has a track record of not being what you described. So whilst you can play Tetris while surfing the net, watching a DVD and spell checking your posts all within Reaper I'll be happy using my stable, firmly specced and well thought out Sonar. Hey...Reaper is a DAW....it doesn't have any non-Daw functioning features. Get it??? That's the focus of the program of being a complete DAW with a simple user interface. Isn't that what we all want??? I know...you like the pretty colors in Sonar...there's nothing wrong with that. You again, make no valid point, unless you're saying I'm asking for a word processor in my DAW then you might be coming close to making a point....the last I checked all the features I have ever suggested for Sonar or Reaper have been used in other music and audio creating software packages....oh yeah, that's what DAW stands for...DIGITAL AUDIO WORKSTATION....thus I guess I would be talking about workflow items used when working with Digital audio. In time, feature after feature after feature will make Reaper so complex and unusable that you'll rue the day you ever thought that was a good thing. Unless of course you're now going to say that Reaper developers don't accede to your every whim and desire and do sometimes say no to things! In which case you'll be saying that they pretty much make value judgements on features.
Well luckily for me Reaper has not fallen into that pitfall that you have grown accustom to. This is what sets Reaper apart from the crowd. That was the original design intent of Reaper, to be able to do everything that every other DAW could and then some yet while maintaining a simple and elegant user interface. I can obviously tell from your statements that you've never spent any time with Reaper or the developers, otherwise you wouldn't be spouting a bunch of non-sense and would realize Reaper is on target with the main focus of it's development. I've used Sonar quite a bit....I can't say it has the same type of focus. It started off as a midi sequencer...now it does audio...yet it's midi feature capabilities still fall short of midi sequencers from 8 years back. That doesn't sound like a well focused app, if I run with the same reasoning you seem to be.
|
yarimurray
Max Output Level: -88 dBFS
- Total Posts : 132
- Joined: 2004/11/29 14:50:32
- Location: Sunny Southern California
- Status: offline
RE: Tried Sonar demo but Reaper kills it
2007/02/14 14:38:39
(permalink)
Original: manthe
Regardless..are you REALLY calling SONAR a sinking ship? If so, there would never be enough exclamation points to put after an LOL for a response to that!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!.....bah
I'm not suggesting that SONAR is a sinking ship. I'm merely alluding to the zealot like disdain being expressed regarding Reaper due to some people's questionable posting behavior. It is always amusing to me to see people's blind loyalty to something getting in the way of objectively evaluating which products or services might best meet their needs (similar to those who built the Titanic being in denial of the ship's vulnerabilities even as the ship sank). I don't see a need to move in sheep like fashion just because everyone else (or no one else) is on a particular bandwagon. Brian: You can all think for yourselves. Multitude: We can all think for ourselves. Brian: You don't need to follow me or anyone. Multitude: We don't need to follow you or anyone . . . I've made a significant investment in SONAR as I mentioned in a previous post and I have no intention of abandoning it anytime soon. However, there may be times when Reaper is the better tool to use to meet my needs. And if that is the case I'll use Reaper without giving it a second thought. That goes for any other products that may come along. The "either/or" attitude is too limiting to me. I prefer a "both/and" attitude. Michael
3.2GHz Dual core 6GB RAM Windows 7 Professional (SP1) - Presonus StudioLive 16.4.2 - SONAR Platinum - Project 5v2 - Dimension Pro - Rapture - REAPER - StudioOne 3 Artist - Capture - Harrison Mixbus (DAW junkie)
|
yarimurray
Max Output Level: -88 dBFS
- Total Posts : 132
- Joined: 2004/11/29 14:50:32
- Location: Sunny Southern California
- Status: offline
RE: Tried Sonar demo but Reaper kills it
2007/02/14 14:45:29
(permalink)
Original: John
Your response is pure nonsense why did you bother? You either missed the point which is very likely or you are unable to think in complete thoughts.
There is really no way to have a discussion with you on this. A nudge is as good as a wink to a blind man.  Michael
3.2GHz Dual core 6GB RAM Windows 7 Professional (SP1) - Presonus StudioLive 16.4.2 - SONAR Platinum - Project 5v2 - Dimension Pro - Rapture - REAPER - StudioOne 3 Artist - Capture - Harrison Mixbus (DAW junkie)
|
yarimurray
Max Output Level: -88 dBFS
- Total Posts : 132
- Joined: 2004/11/29 14:50:32
- Location: Sunny Southern California
- Status: offline
RE: Tried Sonar demo but Reaper kills it
2007/02/14 14:53:18
(permalink)
Original: John
So why are you wasting your breath? A bit long winded too. I heard long-winded posts are 20 to 30% more difficult to read with blinders on.  Michael
3.2GHz Dual core 6GB RAM Windows 7 Professional (SP1) - Presonus StudioLive 16.4.2 - SONAR Platinum - Project 5v2 - Dimension Pro - Rapture - REAPER - StudioOne 3 Artist - Capture - Harrison Mixbus (DAW junkie)
|
someotherguy
Max Output Level: -84 dBFS
- Total Posts : 321
- Joined: 2006/04/19 17:31:37
- Status: offline
RE: Tried Sonar demo but Reaper kills it
2007/02/14 15:33:11
(permalink)
ORIGINAL: Rednroll
For example Reaper had Rewire slave AND host capabilities 2 weeks after getting the SDK from Propellerheads. If you even mention Rewire Slave functionality in the Sonar forums it falls on deaf ears, even after they've had the SDK for numerous years. I mean...who could want to Rewire Sonar to another host thru a rewire device support??? Sonar is perfect in every aspect right??? Why would you ever have the need to use it in that configuration??? You can Rewire Project 5 TO Sonar...that's all you'll ever need. Of course I'm being faceous....but that's the mentality here.
I didn't know that about Reaper. I also fully agree with you that Sonar et al should be Rewire slaves. I can't understand why they are not.
|
xackley
Max Output Level: -45.5 dBFS
- Total Posts : 2973
- Joined: 2004/01/30 09:39:49
- Location: USA
- Status: offline
RE: Tried Sonar demo but Reaper kills it
2007/02/14 16:21:42
(permalink)
i thought this thread needed a bump What's with all the wasted space at the top of Reaper. why are the meters so big and clunky. Why are all the controls in the upper left or lower right. Why can't I see a list of fx without clicking on that button. edit oops lower left. and why do all the track controls disappear when I try to get some more space for the clips.
post edited by xackley - 2007/02/14 17:02:05
|
jinga8
Max Output Level: -17 dBFS
- Total Posts : 5817
- Joined: 2004/02/14 21:45:01
- Location: Oceanside, CA
- Status: offline
RE: Tried Sonar demo but Reaper kills it
2007/02/14 16:23:43
(permalink)
ok, if you guys were around for the shea fiasco...the joke is 20-40%, not 20-30%....at least get your forum troll references right... 
|
nachivnik
Max Output Level: -78 dBFS
- Total Posts : 604
- Joined: 2003/11/04 11:42:55
- Status: offline
RE: Tried Sonar demo but Reaper kills it
2007/02/14 16:34:42
(permalink)
Now we're getting somewhere. Reaper's UI sucks so bad it doesn't matter how well it does anything. It's not just the look of the buttons, which are atrocious. It's the oversized meters, the hidden fx, the overly-large fx window around a synth's UI. The MIDI editor. You could spend the next five years begging for a better UI, and you won't get it, because the mentality surrounding Reaper is that UI is unimportant. (Didn't Cakewalk users recently get accused of being myopic?) The user color presets in Reaper don't even begin to address its UI problems. Not even close. Sonar has color presets too, in case anyone was wondering. UI matters. ORIGINAL: xackley
i thought this thread needed a bump
What's with all the wasted space at the top of Reaper.
why are the meters so big and clunky.
Why are all the controls in the upper left or lower right.
Why can't I see a list of fx without clicking on that button.
|
yarimurray
Max Output Level: -88 dBFS
- Total Posts : 132
- Joined: 2004/11/29 14:50:32
- Location: Sunny Southern California
- Status: offline
RE: Tried Sonar demo but Reaper kills it
2007/02/14 17:16:05
(permalink)
Original: Howdy
Now we're getting somewhere. Reaper's UI sucks so bad it doesn't matter how well it does anything. It's not just the look of the buttons, which are atrocious. It's the oversized meters, the hidden fx, the overly-large fx window around a synth's UI. The MIDI editor. You could spend the next five years begging for a better UI, and you won't get it, because the mentality surrounding Reaper is that UI is unimportant. (Didn't Cakewalk users recently get accused of being myopic?)
The user color presets in Reaper don't even begin to address its UI problems. Not even close. Sonar has color presets too, in case anyone was wondering.
UI matters.
Yeah. My UI kicked your UI's A$$! (At least 20- 40% of the time.)  Michael
3.2GHz Dual core 6GB RAM Windows 7 Professional (SP1) - Presonus StudioLive 16.4.2 - SONAR Platinum - Project 5v2 - Dimension Pro - Rapture - REAPER - StudioOne 3 Artist - Capture - Harrison Mixbus (DAW junkie)
|
kab
Max Output Level: -86 dBFS
- Total Posts : 224
- Joined: 2004/06/23 21:04:08
- Location: NY
- Status: offline
RE: Tried Sonar demo but Reaper kills it
2007/02/14 17:31:40
(permalink)
Reaper's UI sucks so bad it doesn't matter how well it does anything. It's not just the look of the buttons, which are atrocious. It's the oversized meters, the hidden fx, the overly-large fx window around a synth's UI. The MIDI editor. You could spend the next five years begging for a better UI, and you won't get it, because the mentality surrounding Reaper is that UI is unimportant. Without getting too sidetracked here (and no, I am not advocating the purpose of this particular thread)... but UI is, in the grand scheme of things a matter of: a) relative unimportance... what really matters are all those squiggly lines, all those envelopes, and the noise emitting from your speakers, and b) what you're used to. To someone who is not set in their ways to any one app, Reaper may actually make more sense than Sonar does. I certainly know that, being a Sonar user, my first experience seeing Cubase in action was a "good lord this is unneccessarily difficult" and the beginnings of a stress headache... I'm sure that some Cubase users would have the same reaction to Sonar. Much like arguing about what OS is better, its a rather unimportant debate.... they're tools, and nothing more. Whichever helps 'you' make the best music you can (and here again, I suspect that once the record button is hit, it doesn't really matter what you're using) is the most important thing.
|
steve.stang03
Max Output Level: -90 dBFS
- Total Posts : 13
- Joined: 2007/02/11 13:17:55
- Status: offline
RE: Tried Sonar demo but Reaper kills it
2007/02/14 17:36:53
(permalink)
For Sonar 6.2
Why are the fonts/text in Sonar 6.2 so minuscule that they can't even be read on a 19inch Sony CRT at 1280x1024?
The transport bar is almost unreadable.
Does everybody sit 1 foot from their monitor?
Why is the default theme so dark?
In fact why are most of the themes so dark?
Why is the track view such a cluttered mess?
Why is the file system such a complicated mess?
Why are Bun files still unreliable?
Why no pause button?
Why double clicking brings up Loop Construction instead of edit like Nuendo and virtually everyone else.
For Reaper
What's the empty space at the top for?
The meters are too fat (Sonar's are too thin IMHO).
The FX window sucks.
I've only been playing with Reaper for a couple of hours but I haven't figured out how to make a squeak out of my TruePiano VST.
Simple as candy in Sonar, less simple in Nuendo.
The themes are very nice and there are ones for all tastes.
Everything has problems.....
IMHO Nuendo is the interface to beat.
Clean, simple and intuitive.
Sonar is just to cluttered, and yes I know it can all be customized and that's what I have done, but it's still not as good as Nuendo.
Sonar wins for documentation and support, by FAR.......
So use all 3 like I do :)
|
MajorUrsa
Max Output Level: -88 dBFS
- Total Posts : 130
- Joined: 2007/02/01 20:57:43
- Status: offline
RE: Tried Sonar demo but Reaper kills it
2007/02/14 17:37:10
(permalink)
ORIGINAL: Howdy
Now we're getting somewhere. Reaper's UI sucks so bad it doesn't matter how well it does anything. It's not just the look of the buttons, which are atrocious. It's the oversized meters, the hidden fx, the overly-large fx window around a synth's UI. The MIDI editor. You could spend the next five years begging for a better UI, and you won't get it, because the mentality surrounding Reaper is that UI is unimportant. (Didn't Cakewalk users recently get accused of being myopic?)
The user color presets in Reaper don't even begin to address its UI problems. Not even close. Sonar has color presets too, in case anyone was wondering.
UI matters.
True, the UI is considered less important clearly. But somehow I find that comforting, There is only 1 way and 1 way only that a feature will appear. It's all rudimentary but it's direct and clear. I think I like it. I will try to migrate a project from Sonar to Reaper. It's omly midi virtual synths, with only few effects, nothing fancy. Let you know. Ursa..
|
MajorUrsa
Max Output Level: -88 dBFS
- Total Posts : 130
- Joined: 2007/02/01 20:57:43
- Status: offline
RE: Tried Sonar demo but Reaper kills it
2007/02/14 17:44:26
(permalink)
ORIGINAL: jinga8
A basic operation like splitting a note (and glueing them) should be part of any* editor.
* = any editor with the specifications that I sent to the company and they therefore implemented because I am omniscient in the area of what people want in an editing program (btw, this post was TOTALLY easy to, like, post, DUUUUUDE....)
Nothing omniscient about it, just noticed that one specific feature, that was mentioned here time and again (and thus requested by many more), is just available, like that. I wouldn't know a definite set of functions needed in a midi-editor, but to me it seems that adding, deleting, moving and sizing, splitiing and glueing, and let's not forget, selecting, are the essential ones. Those are just the ones you want to do when you are editing midi. Other functions are maybe nice but not really basic. Less functions feels amputated. This is not something new btw. Do you disagree? Ursa..
|